(a) An employer shall not discharge or in any other manner retaliate against an employee
because:
(1) the employee lodged a complaint of a violation of this subchapter;
(2) the employee has cooperated with the Commissioner in an investigation of a violation
of this subchapter; or
(3) the employer believes that the employee may lodge a complaint or cooperate in an investigation
of a violation of this subchapter.
(b) Any person aggrieved by a violation of this section may bring an action in the Civil
Division of the Superior Court seeking compensatory and punitive damages or equitable
relief, including restraint of prohibited acts, restitution of wages or benefits,
reinstatement, costs, reasonable attorney’s fees, and other appropriate relief. (Added 2013, No. 15, § 9.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2019–2025 · leading case: Cole v. Foxmar Inc., 387 F. Supp. 3d 370 (D. Vt. 2019).
Cole v. Foxmar Inc., 387 F. Supp. 3d 370 (D. Vt. 2019). · cites it 6דVESTA incorporates the retaliation provision set forth in 21 V.S.A. § 397, which states: (a) An employer shall not discharge or in any other manner retaliate against an employee because: (1) the employee lodged a complaint of a violation of this subchapter; (2) the employee has…”
William Pettersen v. Monaghan Safar Ducham PLLC, 2021 VT 16 (Vt. 2021). “, 21 V.S.A. §§ 397(a), 495(a)(8), “reflect the overarching public policy in Vermont that employees should not be terminated in retaliation for raising legal claims against employers.”
United States Court of Appeals (2d Cir. 2025). · cites it 2ד” 21 V.S.A. § 397(b). And under VOSHA: “An employee aggrieved by a violation of section 231 of this title may bring an action in Superior Court for appropriate relief, including reinstatement, triple wages, damages, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees.”
Cole v. Foxmar, Inc. (2d Cir. 2025). · cites it 2ד” 21 V.S.A. § 397(b). And under VOSHA: “An employee aggrieved by a violation of section 231 of this title may bring an action in Superior Court for appropriate relief, including reinstatement, triple wages, damages, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees.”
Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 397(a): 2 cases
William Pettersen v. Monaghan Safar Ducham PLLC, 2021 VT 16 (Vt. 2021). “, 21 V.S.A. §§ 397(a), 495(a)(8), “reflect the overarching public policy in Vermont that employees should not be terminated in retaliation for raising legal claims against employers.”
Cole v. Foxmar Inc., 387 F. Supp. 3d 370 (D. Vt. 2019). “VESTA incorporates the retaliation provision set forth in 21 V.S.A. § 397, which states: (a) An employer shall not discharge or in any other manner retaliate against an employee because: (1) the employee lodged a complaint of a violation of this subchapter; (2) the employee has…”
Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 397(a)(1): 1 case
Cole v. Foxmar Inc., 387 F. Supp. 3d 370 (D. Vt. 2019). “VESTA incorporates the retaliation provision set forth in 21 V.S.A. § 397, which states: (a) An employer shall not discharge or in any other manner retaliate against an employee because: (1) the employee lodged a complaint of a violation of this subchapter; (2) the employee has…”
Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 397(b): 2 cases
United States Court of Appeals (2d Cir. 2025). “” 21 V.S.A. § 397(b). And under VOSHA: “An employee aggrieved by a violation of section 231 of this title may bring an action in Superior Court for appropriate relief, including reinstatement, triple wages, damages, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees.”
Cole v. Foxmar, Inc. (2d Cir. 2025). “” 21 V.S.A. § 397(b). And under VOSHA: “An employee aggrieved by a violation of section 231 of this title may bring an action in Superior Court for appropriate relief, including reinstatement, triple wages, damages, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.